Theories pt 3

766 Words4 Pages
This week’s reading lead to some interesting topics, of which this short paper will attempt to discuss. Some of the focuses that the reading went over are: mindfulness, high reliability organization, precautionary principle, ethical issues associated with risk and crisis communication, and global causation.
Mindfulness was a major area of discussion. It seems that mindfulness pays a large role in the area of crisis communication. “Mindfulness is the process of constantly monitoring one’s environment in an effort to detect non-routine events or series of events and anticipate their potential for a crisis (Sellnow and Seeger 2013).” This means keeping your head on a swivel. This means to never stop and affix one’s attention on anything too long. One most take in the current social and political climate and their surroundings to be ever vigilant of what is going on and what might happen. On an organizational level, this means keeping everyone on the lookout and ready to respond, not to every little risk, but trained and ready so that a full-blown crisis does not occur.
One area to watch for is mindless behavior. “Langer offers only two conditions under which mindless behavior is warranted: 1. We have found the best way of doing something, and 2. Things don’t change (Sellnow & Seeger 2013).” Both of these ideas will never ever happen, so in reality mindless behavior will never be warranted.
Once there is a mindfulness approach in an organization, then that organization becomes a High Reliability Organization (HRO). This in turn leads to an infrastructure that, “track small failures; resist oversimplification; remain sensitive to operations; maintain capabilities for resilience; and take advantage of shifting locations of expertise ...

... middle of paper ...

... of cultures. One simply has to drive down the streets of some of our lager cities to see the diversity from block to block. When a crisis happens in largely populated areas with a blend of cultures, we as country need to be able to react and respond in a way that is cross cultured so that the need is meet at the time it was required.
The final takeaway from the required reading is that we need to look at risk/crisis communication such as a scientists looks at something, and that is with a theory-based understanding. The evidence is there and it is ready to be analyzed and applied, however it seems that learning from mistakes is another challenge of its own. One cannot be afraid of failure; one must instead embrace it for the greater good.

Works Cited

Sellnow, Timothy L., and Matthew W. Seeger. Theorizing Crisis Communication. Sussex, UK: Blackwell, 2013. Print.
Open Document